ArticleEuropean heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging2025
Clinical likelihood models calibrated against observed obstructive coronary artery disease on computed tomography angiography.
Article in European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsModels predicting the likelihood of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) on invasive coronary angiography exist. However, as stable patients with new-onset chest pain frequently have lower clinical likelihood and preferably undergo index testing by non-invasive tests such as coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), clinical likelihood models calibrated against observed obstructive CAD at CCTA are warranted. The aim was to develop CCTA-calibrated risk-factor- and coronary artery calcium score-weighted clinical likelihood models (i.e. RF-CLCCTA and CACS-CLCCTA models, respectively). METHODS AND
resultsBased on age, sex, symptoms, and cardiovascular risk factors, an advanced machine learning algorithm utilized a training cohort (n = 38 269) of symptomatic outpatients with suspected obstructive CAD to develop both a RF-CLCCTA model and a CACS-CLCCTA model to predict observed obstructive CAD on CCTA. The models were validated in several cohorts (n = 28 340) and compared with a currently endorsed basic pre-test probability (Basic PTP) model. For both the training and pooled validation cohorts, observed obstructive CAD at CCTA was defined as >50% diameter stenosis. Observed obstructive CAD at CCTA was present in 6443 (22.7%) patients in the pooled validation cohort. While the Basic PTP underestimated the prevalence of observed obstructive CAD at CCTA, the RF-CLCCTA and CACS-CLCCTA models showed superior calibration. Compared with the Basic PTP model, the RF-CLCCTA and CACS-CLCCTA models showed superior discrimination (area under the receiver operating curves 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.72] vs. 0.74 (95% CI 0.73-0.75) and 0.87 (95% CI 0.86-0.87), P < 0.001 for both comparisons).
conclusionCCTA-calibrated clinical likelihood models improve calibration and discrimination of observed obstructive CAD at CCTA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.